Sunday, April 29, 2007

Turkey and the EU


Should Turkey join the European Union?
Such a straightforward question requires a straightforward answer. Such an answer, however, is not easy to be given. One must objectively weigh all the arguments in favor of and against the Turkish accession to the EU and one must also think strategically and envisage a picture of the situation in years to come. Turkey now stands against tremendous opposition and finds little support. There isn’t yet a unanimous position in the EU regarding Turkey. I shall elaborate on what EU’s position should be a little later on but first I would present the obstacles that lay ahead for Turkey.
To understand the present one must look back into the past. In the Middle Ages Europe was presented as a realm of Christendom. It was the smallest continent but it surpassed all others, according to scholars of that time. In the Cosmography Pope Pius II identifies Europe with Respublica Christiana and calls Europe “our home”. In the earliest projects for European unity the aim was a crusade. This is the case with Pierre Dubois’s project in the early XIV century. An other author George of Podebrady, who was in fact a Hussite king of Bohemia, called for a crusade to liberate Constantinople from the Turks. The Ottoman Empire was a threat to Europe for a long period of time and it was only rarely included in the projects of European unification. In the twentieth century before World War II count Coudenhove-Kalergi was uncertain whether Turkey has a place in his Pan-Europa. He stated that Turkey has to undergo a series of reforms before that could happen. Aristide Briand, who first put European Unification in intergovernmental level, totally opposed the inclusion of Turkey.
During the Cold War Turkey’s importance as a geopolitical factor substantially increased. In 1947 the US Congress approved a financial aid for Greece and Turkey of 400 million dollars. This was a part of Truman’s doctrine whose purpose was containment of communism. Turkey became a member of NATO and since 1964 it has been an associate member of the European Economic Community. Turkey fostered good relations with the US and the pro-western approach deteriorated Turkish-middle eastern relations.
Today Turkey is the strongest Muslim country and has big authority among Muslim states. In an essay by Hugh Pope called “Turning to Turkey” the author suggests that:
“Turkey is not moving “east” instead of “west”. Rather it is feeling more confident in being part of both.
This statement gives way to one very important question. How is this possible? Can that country embrace both the so called “Western” values and still be attached to the East? How can we understand this ambiguity between traditional and modern?
In order to join the EU Turkey has to fulfill the Copenhagen criteria. These criteria do not only concern matters of economics but also those of freedom, democracy, rule of law human rights, respect for minorities etc. Ankara has to acknowledge the genocide against the Armenian population in 1915. There is a law in France that validates this genocide.
The law is central to policy making. It outlines the rights and duties of citizens and it serves as a testimony of how democratic a country is. Article 301 in the Turkish penal code states that “insulting Turkish ness” is a criminal offence which leads to up to 3 years of imprisonment. In December 2005 a trial was set against the leading intellectual and Nobel Prize laureate Orhan Pamuk. He was charged with “public denigration” of Turkish identity because in an interview with the Swiss newspaper “Der Tages-Anzeiger” he declared: “30 000 Kurds and a million Armenians were killed in these lands and nobody but e dares to talk about it.” Eventually the prosecution dropped the case but many other intellectual are being sued. Some more violently than others as the edition of “The economist” from March 10th suggests: “In January a Turkish- Armenian newspaper editor, Hrant Dink, was shot dead by a 17 –year-old, Ogun Samast, because he had “insulted the Turks”.
Article 301 is in tightly linked to another alarming tendency - the rise of Turkish nationalism.
In the 1920s nationalism helped Mustafa Kemal Atatürk create a new secular state and now he is praised in every town and village throughout Turkey, his portrait hangs in every school. However Kemalist nationalism (I love Turkey) may often transform into xenophobia. Samuel Huntington describes Turkey as one of the lone countries. It is not attached to the major civilization. It faces a challenge. Huntington supposes that it may shift either to nationalism or to Islamism.
One might argue that nationalism is the better option since it is connected to secularity. Turkey is often being pointed out as an example of a Muslim state that has adopted that kind of political governance. But one should not omit the fact that nationalism has its own perils that may be by no means less pernicious. The history of the twentieth century provides ample evidence to prove this. Even if the government manages to restrain this rampant growth of nationalism there stands the question of EU supranationality. Every country has to pool some of its sovereignty in the Community pillar (first pillar) of the Union. Community interests should come first. If Turkey were to join the EU it would be the country with the biggest population in the Union (now it is smaller than Germany but is a young nation, 23% under 15 years of age, and has a higher birth rate, whereas Germany is an aging country with a low birth rate). This would undoubtedly make Turkey one of the most influential nations in the Union with a lot of MEPs and a lot of votes in the Council of the European Union. This, scenario, however, isn’t entirely correct because in order for a new enlargement to take place The European Union must first undergo a series of institutional reforms and perhaps adopt a common constitution which was implicitly announced in the Berlin Declaration 24-25 March 2007.
By joining the EU Turkey would have access to EU funds. Turkey’s GDP per capita is substantially lower in comparison to the EU members. Turkey has a lot of underdeveloped regions mainly in Anatolia that would yearn for regional development funding making Turkey the largest net recipient in the Union which would destabilize the economy of the Union and may lead to a crisis. Currency is also an important issue. Several years ago Turkey used to have inflation rates as high as 75%. Unstable financial conditions would be an obstacle for entering the Eurozone.
One of the major requirements for a country to join the EU is to be a European one. The former president of France Valery Giscard d’Estaing, an opponent of Turkish accession in the Union, tries to define the boundaries of Europe in an article in the French newspaper “Le Figaro”. He disagrees with de Gaul’s vision - from the Atlantic to the Ural Mountains because that would include Russia. According to Giscar d’Estaing Europe is surrounded by three great neighbours: Russia, Turkey, and the African Mediterranean coast. Europe’s borders can be viewed as a triangle: The Gibraltar, cape North and the Bosporus are the vertices. Morocco was denied membership on grounds that it isn’t a European state. What about Turkey? How much of Turkey is European? Its total area is 780 600 km2 and only 23 700km2 are in the European continent, that makes a little more than 3%. When we look at it from a geographical point of view we see that it has a common border with Iran (454 km), Iraq (331 km) Syria (877 km). If Turkey joined the EU it would stretch to the conflict zone of the Middle East and this would make the Union more exposed to terrorist aggression. Turkey’s geopolitical position now acts as a buffer between the Middle East and Europe. Now Ankara serves as a moderator between countries in the region that are hostile to each other. Turkey was the first Muslim country to recognize Israel in 1949. In the 1980s it grew as a leading regional power when the two other contenders Iran and Iraq impoverished each other through an eight-year war. “It began to dictate its own terms for debts and trade. In 1983, Ankara felt strong enough to start building the vast Atatürk dam on the Euphrates River, staking a claim to the strategic flow of water into the Middle East.” (Hugh Pope, Turning to Turkey, Prospect, November 2006)
A future Turkish membership in the EU might worsen the relations with its anti-western neighbours.
Unless Turkish borders are very well guarded, massive immigration into the EU would happen. Growing concern might cause the waves of immigrants from Turkey as well.
In order for Turkey to join the EU it has to resolve the problem with the Kurds and the Cyprus problem too. The Kurdish question is in close connection to Human rights, especially the Freedom of speech. The strategy used by the government was aimed at Kurdish language. For a long period of time it was against the law to speak in Kurdish. The 1990s were a period of military struggle between the two parties. In 1994 Leyla Zana, the first democratically elected woman in the Turkish parliament, was sentenced to 15 years in prison just for announcing in public that she would work for democracy and peace between Turks and Kurds. She did so in Kurdish language…
The problem can be solved only peacefully and by making concessions. The Kurdish population is too numerous to be underestimated but still it won’t be able to establish an independent state of Kurdistan. Kurds inhabit the territories not only of Turkey but also Iraq, Syria, Iran etc. Furthermore, the organization PKK is considered to be a terrorist organization by EU and the US.
If Turkey is to resume its negotiations with the EU and “thaw” those 8 chapters (so far only one out of 35 has successfully been closed) it has to continue to work diligently on the Cyprus problem. This is a complex issue for it requires close international collaboration. Cyprus wants to use the ports of the Northern part of the island. Turks would allow them to use one sea port and an airport but in return they want the port of Famagusta to be opened to international traffic. This is a stalemate situation. The Turkish diplomat Ali Babadjan explained in a public lecture on 26th March in Sofia that Turkey would keep its end of the deal only after the Cypriot government has done its part. So far they refuse. Most recently the Turkish foreign minister declared that Turkey will continue to work on those 8 frozen chapter in order, as he puts it: “to open and close them in half an hour.”
Let us assume that Turkey complies with everything and solves those problems. Let us assume that Ankara closes all of the chapters. Would Turkey then be allowed in the EU? It is up to the people to decide. A referendum must take place regarding the future enlargement of the Union in several countries. If they say “no” this means “no”. This is why I put a stress on the question that should be publicly discussed. Now! Should Turkey join the European Union? The European Union is famous for its flexible policy. However this won’t do here any good. There are three options: First to decline it right away. This would be the worst option for it would give rise to anti-western notions.
The second option is to say: Yes. At the moment this seems the most impossible option for the popular support of Turkey’s accession is low in most EU member states.
The third option (the one that is now preferred) is to prolong the talks as much as possible. The consequence of this approach is a decrease in the popular support for EU orientation in Turkey. Ankara may begin seeking support elsewhere. The reports of the Turkish lecturer Dr. Burcu Ozdemir in the international conference “Together in Europe” held in Sofia 25-27 March showed that when the EU decided to start the negotiations 2004 popular support was as high as 80%. Now it has fell to little over 40%. This is one of the reasons why nationalism is growing with such enormous rates. EU should try to diminish as much as possible the rising anti-western sentiments among Turks.
Where can Turkey find allies? Relations with Russia and the former Soviet bloc are blossoming. Turkey had traditionally good relations with the US but they have recently declined a little because of the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq and the Iraq-based Kurdish rebels. Turkey is becoming increasingly more influential in the Arab world. Its trade volume in the Muslim world also increases rapidly. “The minister of foreign trade Kürsad Tüzmen believes that the next phase of growth will be with the Middle East.[…] King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has openly declared his interest in Turkey’s achievement and this summer made the first visit of a Saudi monarch to the country in decades.[…] Syria became Turkey’s most lively supporter” (Hugh Pope).
Turkey truly balances between two worlds. It takes advantage both of the western values and Muslim traditions. But also suffers much when these two factors collide, which unfortunately isn’t a rare sight nowadays. If Turkey wants to be an equal European partner it must not forfeit the process of modernization. It should be an example to the whole Muslim world.


Dobrin Stanev
Age 19
Sofia University
Faculty of Philosophy
European Studies
Student, first year








Bibliography:

Pope Hugh, ‘Turning to Turkey’, Prospect (November 2006)
Huntington Samuel, ‘The Clash of Civilizations’
Giscard D’Estaing Valerie , article in “Le Figaro” (5th March 2005)
‘E!Sharp’ (January-February 2006)
‘Waving Atatürks flag’, ‘The Economist’ (10th March)
Angel Gurria-Quintana interview with Orhan Pamuk, ‘Prospect’ (December 2006)
Countries of the World Dimitrov, Bojinov, Lukanov (Sofia: ‘Gloria Palace’ 2007)
Ozdemir Burcu PhD, ‘Turkey and the EU: Just another enlargement or an Open-ended Process’

About Me

My photo
My name is Dobrin Stanev. Welcome to my blog dedicated to International Political Theory. My sphere of interests also includes European integration, because I graduated with a degree in European studies from the Sofia University